Is SMG a Marketing failure, rather than a technical failure

The news that US Spec E90s 330s will not come with SMG, was a big disappointment to me. Some dealers like SARAFIL have posted that there is little demand for it. However I see very little awareness about the SMG. Most people do not know what it is and what it can do. The reviews in the automotive press have been mixed. Based on the comments I have read, most people do not understand how an SMG is to be driven. I drive a Z4 SMG and will chose an SMG over anything else, any day. I think the lackluster performance of the SMG in the US is more to do with poor marketing than poor technology.

I have the following questions:

1. Why is there no instructional DVD which guides new buyers about the following:
- What is an SMG
- How is it different from an slush box and an H manual
- How to drive a car with an SMG transmission
- In the manual shift mode
- In the automatic mode
- How to maximize your driving experience (Sports Mode, Auto Mode etc.)
- How to have smooth shifts with minimal jerks

You go to driving school as a teenager to learn driving an auto; so why no instructional DVD for folks learning a manual transmission.

2. Why is there no mention of the SMG in the BMW advertising material?
I am sure there are a lot of folks out there who want to complete the "ultimate driving experience" by having the control of a manual shifter. However, like me, most of them do not want a traditional manual. Either they do not want to mess with a clutch after a lifetime of slush-box, or share the car with someone who can not drive a manual. Why not explicitly target that semi-enthusiast market?

3. SMG as a differentiator:
When I was cross-shopping, I did not consider the Honda S2000 or the Nissan Z roadsters, because they do not have the SMG. In fact the only choices were the Z4 and the Porsches. With Infiniti and Acura closing the gap between them and the Bimmer, why doesn't BMW use the availability of the SMG as a clincher? I know it was the clincher for me. To me it seems like a wasted opportunity to highlight the Bimmers technical superiority over the Japanese.

Reply » Is SMG a Marketing failure, rather than a technical failure

I agree. SMG was not a technical failure. It was a communications failure. Too many people went to it looking for a better automatic while it really was a better manual.
Personally I loved SMG and I miss it now that I´m back to a manual in my E90.

But I guess the point is moot. The double clutch trannys that are comming up will be better than any manual and any auto combining the best of both worlds. They are great allready and will become even better.

Little known trivia: Porsche raced the Le Mans 24 hours in 1986 with a 962C with a twin-clutch box (known as the PDK (Porsche DoppelKupplungsgetriebe)). The car retired after 42 laps though. . Then the electronics were not competent enough for adaption of the principle in a road car, but today the computing power is there to finally get twin-clutch setups working in daily and long-term use.

Reply » Is SMG a Marketing failure, rather than a technical failure

most of the rest of the world isn't burdened by the addiction to Testosterone that afflicts us here in the USA.
Hence the "Row My Own or Die" luddite mentality so prevelant here.
there is nothing wrong with the SMG/DSG ( or anyother chosen TLA) and they are every bit as interactive and engaging if driven correctly.
YMMV.

Reply » Is SMG a Marketing failure, rather than a technical failure

Quote:

Bull****. SMG is every bit as functional, and in some case more so than a manual, but there is absolutely no justifiable way in hell that you can claim it's as interactive. And I'm actually happy with SMG again, now that it's working properly.

Reply » Is SMG a Marketing failure, rather than a technical failure

Quote:

there is nothing wrong with the SMG/DSG ( or anyother chosen TLA) and they are every bit as interactive and engaging if driven correctly.
YMMV.

Actually, SMG had many bad reviews from car magazines. It wasn't the concept they hated, but the execution. My next new car will probably have some variation of an automated manual, but the current variation offered in 330's and Z4's wasn't advanced enough for me.

Reply » Is SMG a Marketing failure, rather than a technical failure

probally would have been more successful in the e46 & e85 had they recieved the same version that is in e46 m3's

I wonder why it was not- most articles I read on the m3 raved about it, and those on the z4 denigrated it

two more things held it back:

1) need for the sport package- if someone didn't want zsp, then smg becomes a $3k+ option, quite pricey...should have been offered in any config just like step (why wasn't it? I suppose the same reason M seats need the sport package in the z4...to force you to buy more options and raise more $)
2) price in general. smg is more $ than step. thus those who only really want an auto will still get the auto and save a couple hundred $, and those that want to get out the door as cheap as possible won't want to spend an extra $2k when they would just as soon drive a manual
perhaps if it was cheaper

now I wonder if it did better/worse in the 5er & 6er, as it's a no cost option, thus eliminating both of the above. though I think the average buyer of those vehicles is probally much dif. than those whom buy z's & 3's, and likely less prone to even want to drive a smg (or manual)...

Page 1 of 12